Are U.S. Military Leaders Lying to Us Re Afghanistan?

[Rohirrim]

“How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding?“ Colonel Davis asks in an article summarizing his views titled “Truth, Lies and Afghanistan: How Military Leaders Have Let Us Down.” It was published online Sunday in The Armed Forces Journal, the nation’s oldest independent periodical on military affairs. “No one expects our leaders to always have a successful plan,” he says in the article. “But we do expect — and the men who do the living, fighting and dying deserve — to have our leaders tell us the truth about what’s going on.”


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/the-afghanistan-report-the-pentagon-doesnt-want-you-to-read-20120210

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/world/asia/army-colonel-challenges-pentagons-afghanistan-claims.html?_r=1

[orinjkrush]

truth is many, many generals and admirals are more political animals than military.

its called senate ratification of those stars.

[Odysseus]

Yes.

[Tombstone RJ]

truth is many, many generals and admirals are more political animals than military.

its called senate ratification of those stars.

yep, high ranking officers don't always get there on their abilities, it's more on their connections. If our military has a weak spot, this is it.

[W*GS]

In any organization of any decent size, those who make it to the top levels are there because of politics. That's their job.

[peacepipe]

they've been lying about wars for centuries.

[barryr]

This only makes major news with a republican sitting in the WH. This only becomes bigger news when Obama can somehow be excluded from blame so the MSM's hero's chances of staying president are not hurt by it.

[W*GS]

It was *your* Prez, barry, that ****ed up Afghanistan by diverting resources to Iraq.

The aftershocks of the colossal ****up that was the Bush administration will take decades to fix.

[That One Guy]

LOL

I've been saying folks in charge didn't know WTF they were doing for years now. I was in the FCS program they mention him having worked in (it was a fairly small program) and don't recognize the name so he might've been there in the earlier years. Most likely he's been back out in the real army for a few years. All I can say is he was as disillusioned as everyone else if it took this long to notice the failures.

[That One Guy]

It was *your* Prez, barry, that ****ed up Afghanistan by diverting resources to Iraq.

The aftershocks of the colossal ****up that was the Bush administration will take decades to fix.

In complete hindsight, I'd actually say the resurgence of interest in "al Qaeda" rather than continuing to force out the Taliban is where the problem arises. Most likely it was a coverup but when Bush said he 'didn't really care where Osama was', he might've been taking the best approach. The Taliban had been a lot more pressured in the earlier days but have rebounded quite a bit over the last few years. Take into consideration the accounts that say the Taliban are just biding their time now because they know we're gonna wrap things up and the "what if...?" scenarios start to get quite interesting.

[barryr]

It was *your* Prez, barry, that ****ed up Afghanistan by diverting resources to Iraq.

The aftershocks of the colossal ****up that was the Bush administration will take decades to fix.

My president? I don't remember you being that upset with much Bush did until after Obama became president and then pulling a 180 and then fixating on global warming and aligning yourself with other liberal policies and acting like you never supported anything Bush did. So one has to wonder how someone can really change their stances on many issues that fast. You somehow forget how spidey decided to waste so much thread space not long ago, attacking us both at the same time since we agreed so much? Hmm.

[ant1999e]

Hey Wags, you got knocked the f out man...

[W*GS]

My president? I don't remember you being that upset with much Bush did until after Obama became president and then pulling a 180 and then fixating on global warming and aligning yourself with other liberal policies and acting like you never supported anything Bush did. So one has to wonder how someone can really change their stances on many issues that fast. You somehow forget how spidey decided to waste so much thread space not long ago, attacking us both at the same time since we agreed so much? Hmm.

I gave the Bush administration the benefit of a doubt. I was wrong. Given the outcomes of Bush's policies, it was a mistake on my part to think that, at the time, he wasn't that bad of a President.

I change my opinions to reflect the facts. What do you do? Steadfastly maintain your views despite reality, it would appear.

[That One Guy]

I gave the Bush administration the benefit of a doubt. I was wrong. Given the outcomes of Bush's policies, it was a mistake on my part to think that, at the time, he wasn't that bad of a President.

I change my opinions to reflect the facts. What do you do? Steadfastly maintain your views despite reality, it would appear.

You think you're the only person that changed opinions? That sounds about like the exact same process many people I know went through.

The only difference is that now that you've come to the conclusion you do, you seem to feel enlightened by pretending no one else sees what you saw. You've gone almost to the levels of LABF on attacking people by simply calling them Bushfans.

[Odysseus]

they've been lying about wars for centuries.

I am shocked! Appalled! Remember the Maine! Remember the Alamo! Remember Restrepo! Remember the Orangemane!

[Odysseus]

In complete hindsight, I'd actually say the resurgence of interest in "al Qaeda" rather than continuing to force out the Taliban is where the problem arises. Most likely it was a coverup but when Bush said he 'didn't really care where Osama was', he might've been taking the best approach. The Taliban had been a lot more pressured in the earlier days but have rebounded quite a bit over the last few years. Take into consideration the accounts that say the Taliban are just biding their time now because they know we're gonna wrap things up and the "what if...?" scenarios start to get quite interesting.

China is chomping at the bit for us to leave. The minerals that were uncovered and released in an American report pretty much assures they have a strong interest in this place.

Military leaders never lie. They repeat the truth they were given by congress and/or the truth their leadership devolves them to share. There are military leaders speaking out against Afghanistan in a very public and official capacity. Their careers will end and they will be hired by some think tank but nobody here thinks this place is being run effectively.

I think Obama is making the all the right moves with drones, cyber warfare initiative, revamping China policy, re-positioning military assets, increasing Special Forces use, and asking the right people for input and feedback. Despite his lack of military experience he is actually listening to his military advisers instead of less informed members within the DNC.

Romney would repeal most anything that benefits consumers or reverses anything that supports small business, average guys, and so malleable I cannot imagine him being much more than a corporate tool.

Mitt will be a mediocre president because, so far, he doesn't initiate anything only perpetuate. Mitt has not done anything in regards to explaining his positions overseas or military effectively.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/08/romney-would-repeal-dodd-frank-law/FrxSh5Jqsdveyjy5tgKzxK/index.html

[Rohirrim]

Since the time of Alexander the Great, Afghanistan hasn't changed. Every conquerer has brought their own hubris, their own belief in their own magnificence, and then left their blood and treasure in the dirt of Afghanistan. The place swallows up armies the way a pond absorbs a pebble. The ripples die down and nothing has changed.

[That One Guy]

Since the time of Alexander the Great, Afghanistan hasn't changed. Every conquerer has brought their own hubris, their own belief in their own magnificence, and then left their blood and treasure in the dirt of Afghanistan. The place swallows up armies the way a pond absorbs a pebble. The ripples die down and nothing has changed.

The US had no trouble conquering the land. They just weren't willing to be as stern as the population needed. No nation before us was capable of going where they wanted, when they wanted. If we'd been willing to carpet bomb the country from one side to the other, the country would absolutely be conquered.

We didn't let our ego, hubris, or whatever else you want to call it get in our way. We let our politics. The same thing that has gotten us since the Korean war.

[cutthemdown]

Since the time of Alexander the Great, Afghanistan hasn't changed. Every conquerer has brought their own hubris, their own belief in their own magnificence, and then left their blood and treasure in the dirt of Afghanistan. The place swallows up armies the way a pond absorbs a pebble. The ripples die down and nothing has changed.

Our army has done just fine really. We could easily keep control its just not worth it. For one we can't kill like an army really needs to win a war. Whatever people want to think we haven't unleashed out firepower on Afghanistan. We did in the first days of the war when the Taliban still had an army. A lot of people don't know this, but we dropped fuel air bombs on them. For people who don't know a fuel air bomb is like a poor mans nuclear bomb. It literally vaporizes troops. If we wanted to we could drop those any every unfriendly village. But then the world would really hate us. At this point I'd say we proved our point not to let Al Queda attack the USA. I don't think the Taliban will want to go down that road again anytime soon.

Both Bush and Obama did a pretty good job letting the military make the big tactical decisions. Now its time for Obama to make the decision to get us out. I support him and think its time to leave. I don't think Obama willing to do what it would take, and even if he was it wouldn't be worth it. Obama knows this, so did Bush jr IMO, thats why he focused on Iraq, it was more winnable.

[Odysseus]

I think our military has done a fine job.

Our politicians have failed us over and over again. Rumsfield was a disaster. Bush made some brilliant moves contrasted with disastrous short sightedness. Obama is doing exactly what needs to be done for the long run but in the short run there are too many compromises.

Why isn't Mitt and the other Republicans touring Afghanistan showing off their military swagger? Checking on the soldiers? Have any of them served? Obama, despite our perceptions, as a war time president has done what he said he would do and more.

It wasn't our egos that kept Afghanistan from being put in check or the will of the Afghan people. It was politics, dangerously stupid rules, and political short sightedness.

The soldiers deserve our respect not our pity.

[Rohirrim]

The US had no trouble conquering the land. They just weren't willing to be as stern as the population needed. No nation before us was capable of going where they wanted, when they wanted. If we'd been willing to carpet bomb the country from one side to the other, the country would absolutely be conquered.

We didn't let our ego, hubris, or whatever else you want to call it get in our way. We let our politics. The same thing that has gotten us since the Korean war.

:bs: That's what Nixon said about North Vietnam. Result? Not just wrong, but MOTHER****ING WRONG. ;D

[That One Guy]

:bs: That's what Nixon said about North Vietnam. Result? Not just wrong, but MOTHER****ING WRONG. ;D

A country can be conquered by bombing anything that moves. I will downright guarantee it.

[Rohirrim]

Our army has done just fine really. We could easily keep control its just not worth it. For one we can't kill like an army really needs to win a war. Whatever people want to think we haven't unleashed out firepower on Afghanistan. We did in the first days of the war when the Taliban still had an army. A lot of people don't know this, but we dropped fuel air bombs on them. For people who don't know a fuel air bomb is like a poor mans nuclear bomb. It literally vaporizes troops. If we wanted to we could drop those any every unfriendly village. But then the world would really hate us. At this point I'd say we proved our point not to let Al Queda attack the USA. I don't think the Taliban will want to go down that road again anytime soon.

Both Bush and Obama did a pretty good job letting the military make the big tactical decisions. Now its time for Obama to make the decision to get us out. I support him and think its time to leave. I don't think Obama willing to do what it would take, and even if he was it wouldn't be worth it. Obama knows this, so did Bush jr IMO, thats why he focused on Iraq, it was more winnable.

You never read the articles (your comments prove that), but you go ahead and post anyway. We are not in "control" of Afghanistan. That's the whole point of Col. Davis' assertions. It's a lie.

I notice the Right Wingers are totally caught up in the exact "hubris" I was talking about. Do you really think the Soviets didn't unleash all they had on Afghanistan?

These kinds of comments give a lot of insight into exactly why we keep ending up in these kinds of bs, multi-year conflicts: We learn nothing. We keep doing the same **** over an over again, and we learn nothing. We thought our military could easily do what the Soviet military couldn't do. Or the British, for that matter. The U.S. dropped 1.5 million tons of bombs on Germany. We dropped 8 million tons on Vietnam. Look at a map. Note the difference in size between Vietnam and Afghanistan. :oyvey:

Obama is not "...willing to do what it takes?" Sorry, but that is just a dumfuque statement.

[BroncoInferno]

A country can be conquered by bombing anything that moves. I will downright guarantee it.

You clearly have zero understanding of Afghanistan's geography. The centralized areas of the country which the US was more or less able to take control over represents only a small portion of the country. Much of the Afghany population is concerntrated in the Hindu Kush mountain range which the US (and conquering armies for centuries) was able to get very little control over. Some of these areas are so remote that the people don't even realize a centralized government exists. The Taliban simply vanished into the mountains, took control over most of the villages through terror, and used guerrilla tactics via their superior knowledge of the terrain & surrounding cultures effectively against our armies. Bombing that kind of terrain is nearly worthless and has zero political impact.

[Rohirrim]

A country can be conquered by bombing anything that moves. I will downright guarantee it.

Your "guarantee" is worthless. History says otherwise.

[That One Guy]

You clearly have zero understanding of Afghanistan's geography. The centralized areas of the country which the US was more or less able to take control over represents only a small portion of the country. Much of the Afghany population is concerntrated in the Hindu Kush mountain range which the US (and conquering armies for centuries) was able to get very little control over. Some of these areas are so remote that the people don't even realize a centralized government exists. The Taliban simply vanished into the mountains, took control over most of the villages through terror, and used guerrilla tactics via their superior knowledge of the terrain & surrounding cultures effectively against our armies. Bombing that kind of terrain is nearly worthless and has zero political impact.

We've known for some time where the Taliban stronghold has existed. We were blowing the crap out of everything in sight and then some civilians started getting killed and they reigned things in.

A policy of killing everything in sight will work. Guerrilla tactics don't work against IR sensors and rockets. If all else fails, you litter everything with WP and watch it burn.

It'll always be a matter of how far we're willing to go to win a war.

[Odysseus]

It's about mineral rights, poppy fields, and making deals with a corrupt NARCO state. It's not a big Army mission. It's a Special Forces mission.

[alkemical]

China is chomping at the bit for us to leave. The minerals that were uncovered and released in an American report pretty much assures they have a strong interest in this place.

Military leaders never lie. They repeat the truth they were given by congress and/or the truth their leadership devolves them to share. There are military leaders speaking out against Afghanistan in a very public and official capacity. Their careers will end and they will be hired by some think tank but nobody here thinks this place is being run effectively.

I think Obama is making the all the right moves with drones, cyber warfare initiative, revamping China policy, re-positioning military assets, increasing Special Forces use, and asking the right people for input and feedback. Despite his lack of military experience he is actually listening to his military advisers instead of less informed members within the DNC.

Romney would repeal most anything that benefits consumers or reverses anything that supports small business, average guys, and so malleable I cannot imagine him being much more than a corporate tool.

Mitt will be a mediocre president because, so far, he doesn't initiate anything only perpetuate. Mitt has not done anything in regards to explaining his positions overseas or military effectively.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/08/romney-would-repeal-dodd-frank-law/FrxSh5Jqsdveyjy5tgKzxK/index.html


Agree on Romney. In a way, he's a symbol of how we got "here".

[alkemical]

It's about mineral rights, poppy fields, and making deals with a corrupt NARCO state. It's not a big Army mission. It's a Special Forces mission.

It would be interesting to know how the Poppy business does these days, and whom is "moving the market".

[Rohirrim]

. If all else fails, you litter everything with WP and watch it burn.



Doesn't that kind of negate the concept that we're the good guys? Ha!

[That One Guy]

Doesn't that kind of negate the concept that we're the good guys? Ha!

You're changing your point.

My point before was that it isn't the terrain that's keeping us from conquering Afghanistan. I even went so far as to say, "A country can be conquered by bombing anything that moves." to which you responded that "history proved otherwise." Well, no, history proved that the Soviets trying to conquer conventionally doesn't work and we've proven that people don't appreciate being conquered - even if by a person claiming to be a knight in shining armor. If, however, we let loose, we could have easily conquered Afghanistan.

[Rohirrim]

You're changing your point.

My point before was that it isn't the terrain that's keeping us from conquering Afghanistan. I even went so far as to say, "A country can be conquered by bombing anything that moves." to which you responded that "history proved otherwise." Well, no, history proved that the Soviets trying to conquer conventionally doesn't work and we've proven that people don't appreciate being conquered - even if by a person claiming to be a knight in shining armor. If, however, we let loose, we could have easily conquered Afghanistan.

We pretty much bombed or napalmed every square inch of Vietnam. Some estimate that we killed almost 2 million Vietnamese. Still, they didn't quit. Look at a satellite map of Afghanistan. There isn't enough willie pete in the world to cover every one of those valleys and every one of those mountains. Even nukes wouldn't reach down into every cave. Anyway, while you're off killing one side of the country, the other side is raising new insurgents. You must have served in the Air Force. They're the only ones who believe the fantasy that you can win from the air.

[alkemical]

It would be interesting to know how the Poppy business does these days, and whom is "moving the market".

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/227134.html

Production of Afghan heroin jumps by 61%: UN

[That One Guy]

We pretty much bombed or napalmed every square inch of Vietnam. Some estimate that we killed almost 2 million Vietnamese. Still, they didn't quit. Look at a satellite map of Afghanistan. There isn't enough willie pete in the world to cover every one of those valleys and every one of those mountains. Even nukes wouldn't reach down into every cave. Anyway, while you're off killing one side of the country, the other side is raising new insurgents. You must have served in the Air Force. They're the only ones who believe the fantasy that you can win from the air.

Sigh...

The problem with Vietnam was our hesitance to go after the havens in the North. We wanted to hold the South rather than go after the North. We bombed, defoliated, and stomped all over the South but if we'd just started laying into every population center in North Vietnam with as many bombs as we could muster, it'd have made a difference. Whether that would've brought the Chinese in full force and thus made the war worse, that's a different story.

At the end of the day, I don't know how to convey the point to someone willing to argue with silly ideas. If we were willing to carpet bomb all the major population centers in Afghanistan and wipe out half their population, we'd have quite the start to conquering. If we then went to the areas where we thought they were hiding and bombed them again, we'd get more. They couldn't exist without congregating and our technology could find congregations. Once you have ~20+ million people killed, you could march in the infantry and armor and, once again, kill anything that moved.

Stop reading when you come to the conclusion that people can't just exist in an invisible parallel universe. The problem we currently have is that the bad guys hide amongst the innocents. If you were willing to kill those innocents, the US has the might and firepower to conquer the country. Whether that's the answer or not is not the point here. It's merely whether the US is being hindered by a lack of capability or a lack of willingness. The US absolutely COULD conquer Afghanistan if it wanted to. If you're still willing to argue that, you're just trying to win an internet fight and people so caught up with winning for the sake of claiming victory aren't really worth talking to.

[Odysseus]

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/227134.html

Production of Afghan heroin jumps by 61%: UN

Poppies were featured in Wizard of Oz. There is no yellow brick road but there is one of nickel cadmium.

[alkemical]

understood.

[Odysseus]

Sigh...

The problem with Vietnam was our hesitance to go after the havens in the North. We wanted to hold the South rather than go after the North. We bombed, defoliated, and stomped all over the South but if we'd just started laying into every population center in North Vietnam with as many bombs as we could muster, it'd have made a difference. Whether that would've brought the Chinese in full force and thus made the war worse, that's a different story.

At the end of the day, I don't know how to convey the point to someone willing to argue with silly ideas. If we were willing to carpet bomb all the major population centers in Afghanistan and wipe out half their population, we'd have quite the start to conquering. If we then went to the areas where we thought they were hiding and bombed them again, we'd get more. They couldn't exist without congregating and our technology could find congregations. Once you have ~20+ million people killed, you could march in the infantry and armor and, once again, kill anything that moved.

Stop reading when you come to the conclusion that people can't just exist in an invisible parallel universe. The problem we currently have is that the bad guys hide amongst the innocents. If you were willing to kill those innocents, the US has the might and firepower to conquer the country. Whether that's the answer or not is not the point here. It's merely whether the US is being hindered by a lack of capability or a lack of willingness. The US absolutely COULD conquer Afghanistan if it wanted to. If you're still willing to argue that, you're just trying to win an internet fight and people so caught up with winning for the sake of claiming victory aren't really worth talking to.

We cannot afford to carpet bomb this place. The global community would be up in arms especially China. China would use their considerable might to destroy us and if you included OPEC's influence we would be on our knees within a matter of weeks. We might have the firepower but we don't have the fuel. We live in a global world and all the little people who we trade with us would stop.

The world is aligning up against us and nobody seems to get why some of the necessary evils that are being pushed on us are happening. If our income tax revenues are down from outsourced jobs, real unemployment, and consumer spending being down where exactly is the FED going to get more money? Tax cuts? The RNC is playing on both sides of this coin. They want to ship our jobs overseas in order to compete globally but do not want the federal government to do anything for anybody with less than what they had last year. It's selfish and short sighted.

They want to expand the military industrial complex while not having any accountability for what it does or even understand the real mission or real stakes. I don't smoke and mirrors but could you at least HAVE an objective?

[That One Guy]

We cannot afford to carpet bomb this place. The global community would be up in arms especially China. China would use their considerable might to destroy us and if you included OPEC's influence we would be on our knees within a matter of weeks. We might have the firepower but we don't have the fuel. We live in a global world and all the little people who we trade with us would stop.

The world is aligning up against us and nobody seems to get why some of the necessary evils that are being pushed on us are happening. If our income tax revenues are down from outsourced jobs, real unemployment, and consumer spending being down where exactly is the FED going to get more money? Tax cuts? The RNC is playing on both sides of this coin. They want to ship our jobs overseas in order to compete globally but do not want the federal government to do anything for anybody with less than what they had last year. It's selfish and short sighted.

They want to expand the military industrial complex while not having any accountability for what it does or even understand the real mission or real stakes. I don't smoke and mirrors but could you at least HAVE an objective?

The discussion was simply whether the US hadn't conquered Afghanistan due to a lack of might or political reasons. The things you list are more political reasons. In a vacuum, if the US unleashes their entire arsenal with the sole objective of conquering the country without regard for collateral damage, it could be accomplished. The other guy simply said America had failed for the same reason the Soviets did and that's just inaccurate.

As for the rest, I say preservation of the country is more important than any people. When the union soldiers gave their lives to win the civil war, they seemed to be saying the same thing. Now that preservation of some people is threatening to bankrupt and collapse everything, people are just lining up with their hands out and saying damn the future.

[Odysseus]

The discussion was simply whether the US hadn't conquered Afghanistan due to a lack of might or political reasons. The things you list are more political reasons. In a vacuum, if the US unleashes their entire arsenal with the sole objective of conquering the country without regard for collateral damage, it could be accomplished. The other guy simply said America had failed for the same reason the Soviets did and that's just inaccurate.

As for the rest, I say preservation of the country is more important than any people. When the union soldiers gave their lives to win the civil war, they seemed to be saying the same thing. Now that preservation of some people is threatening to bankrupt and collapse everything, people are just lining up with their hands out and saying damn the future.

I did not realize anyone doubted American military might. We could stomp the piss out of Iran and Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. War is supposed to nasty, quick, and then over with. This crap (AFG) is annoying and stupid.

All military engagements that last 100 years or more were initiated by political process. The rules of engagement are not dictated by military.

[alkemical]

I did not realize anyone doubted American military might. We could stomp the piss out of Iran and Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. War is supposed to nasty, quick, and then over with. This crap (AFG) is annoying and stupid.

All military engagements that last 100 years or more were initiated by political process. The rules of engagement are not dictated by military.

Now, we don't make policy here. Elected officials, civilians, do that. We are their instruments and must always act as though we are at war. - Top Gun

:D

[That One Guy]

I did not realize anyone doubted American military might. We could stomp the piss out of Iran and Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. War is supposed to nasty, quick, and then over with. This crap (AFG) is annoying and stupid.

All military engagements that last 100 years or more were initiated by political process. The rules of engagement are not dictated by military.

Sounds like we agree.

[Cito Pelon]

Our army has done just fine really. We could easily keep control its just not worth it. For one we can't kill like an army really needs to win a war. Whatever people want to think we haven't unleashed out firepower on Afghanistan. We did in the first days of the war when the Taliban still had an army. A lot of people don't know this, but we dropped fuel air bombs on them. For people who don't know a fuel air bomb is like a poor mans nuclear bomb. It literally vaporizes troops. If we wanted to we could drop those any every unfriendly village. But then the world would really hate us. At this point I'd say we proved our point not to let Al Queda attack the USA. I don't think the Taliban will want to go down that road again anytime soon.

Both Bush and Obama did a pretty good job letting the military make the big tactical decisions. Now its time for Obama to make the decision to get us out. I support him and think its time to leave. I don't think Obama willing to do what it would take, and even if he was it wouldn't be worth it. Obama knows this, so did Bush jr IMO, thats why he focused on Iraq, it was more winnable.

Yeah, I think that was the point all along. Just destroy the safe haven Al Queda had as a base of operations, for a while anyway. Really, that's all you can do with that country.

No telling what it will look like in 10 years after the inevitable pullout. No nation on earth wants to get stuck long term in that country, like Rohirrim said above.

I was reading an account of a couple British expeditions in the mid to late 1800's (Elphinstone in 1842 and Maiwand in 1880), that was a long time ago, but has anything changed that much?

[That One Guy]

Yeah, I think that was the point all along. Just destroy the safe haven Al Queda had as a base of operations, for a while anyway. Really, that's all you can do with that country.

No telling what it will look like in 10 years after the inevitable pullout. No nation on earth wants to get stuck long term in that country, like Rohirrim said above.

I was reading an account of a couple British expeditions in the mid to late 1800's (Elphinstone in 1842 and Maiwand in 1880), that was a long time ago, but has anything changed that much?

The sad part is we could've been bombing and humiliating the Taliban without ever stepping foot in their country.

[Odysseus]

Sounds like we agree.

I hate the way the military isn't utilized for what the true intention is. Half measures are garbage. Do the deed or send diplomats.

[Odysseus]

The sad part is we could've been bombing and humiliating the Taliban without ever stepping foot in their country.

This is the new version of "death from above". The whole army is getting more focused on precision rather than size of force. This is why this whole war is a Special Forces mission and why we need to reduce Army to a support role and pull 80% of our soldiers out of here. I don't think we should ever close the doors to this place. That is not possible.

[alkemical]

http://www.disinfo.com/2012/03/the-seven-worst-international-aid-ideas/

But the actual worst may be the United States’ scattering the hills of Afghanistan with food packets — intended for hungry Afghan children — identical in appearance to the cluster bombs also scattered by the U.S. through the same regions:

Each yellow BLU-97 bomblet is the size of a soda can and is capable of killing anyone within a 50 meter radius and severely injuring anyone within 100 meters from the detonation. A Humanitarian Daily Rations (HDR) package contains a 2,000 calorie meal.

It was inevitable that Afghans coming across the yellow packages in the field would confuse the two. Children in particular — with no English and little idea of what a BLU-97 is even if they did — would investigate the yellow containers and try to pick them up, with devastating consequences that an Air Force general described as “unfortunate.”


http://disinfo.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/cluster1111.jpg